Math 455 Homework Saff&Snider Sec 4.3, p128 _________________________________________________________________________ #1e. (sin z)^2 cos z has an antiderivative (1/3) (sin z)^3. #1f. e^z cos z should be integrated by parts. #1g. z^(1/2) has an antiderivative (2/3) z^(3/2). #1h. Note that integrating by parts provides us with an antiderivative for (Log z)^2. Namely, F(z) = z (Log z)^2 - 2z (Log z - 1) is an antiderivative for (Log z)^2. Hence, using our path independence thm we can simply evaluate this antiderivative at the end points of the given path gamma and get the value of the integral. Namely, \int_gamma (Log z)^2 d = F(i) - F(1) = (2+pi) + i(2 - pi^2 /4). ________________________________________________________________________ #4. False. Note that according to Cauchy's Thm f has to be analytic on and inside the closed contour gamma. Thus, f being analytic only on gamma is not sufficient. Ex. The integral of f(z) = 1/z on the closed contour |z|=1. _______________________________________________________________________ #10. We need to show the following (by the def of a lim) For any \epsilon > 0 there exists a \delta > 0 s.t. |\delta z - 0| < \delta => |int_{0}^{1}f(z+t\delta z) dt - f(z)| < \epsilon. Now we for an arbitrary \epsilon > 0 we calculate \delta. |\int_{0}^{1}f(z+t\delta z) dt - f(z)| = |[\int_0}^{1} f(z + t\delta z) - f(z)] dt \leq \int_{0}^{1} |f(z+t\delta z) - f(z)| dt, (By Jensen's inequality) < \epsilon \int_{0}^{1} dt < \epsilon since it follows from the continuity of f that for any \epsilon > 0 there is a \delta > 0 s.t. |delta z| < \delta => |f(z + t \delta z) - f(z)| < \epsilon. ________________________________________________________________________ #11. Here just follow the hint, i.e., apply Thm 6 to the function d(fg)/dz. Consider a contour \gamma. Then, the function d(fg)/dz obviously has an antiderivative, fg, in the region of consideration D (f and g must have continuous derivative in D which contains \gamma). Hence, \int_{\gamma} d(fg)\dz = (fg)(z_2) - (fg)(z_1). But, the integrand in the LHS of the above equation can be re-written using the product rule for differentiation. That will give the result we need.